Venue in patent cases lies "in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business." Since 1990, the Federal Circuit interpreted the term "resides" coextensively with the general venue statute such that patent venue lay where the defendant was subject to personal jurisdiction. But this year, the Supreme Court greatly narrowed that definition in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods. The Federal Circuit, in turn, interpreted the newly-relevant alternative phrase. After two decades of relaxed patent venue rules, these decisions work a seismic shift in patent litigation.
After Several IP-Heavy Seasons, the 2017 Term At the U.S. Supreme Court Looks to Be a Quiet One for Intellectual Property — with One Big Exception
The 2017 term at the U.S. Supreme Court looks to be a quiet one for intellectual property. But with one potential bang in the middle.
Marcus S. Harris
Registering and protecting product designs is challenging. Preliminarily, trade dress cannot be registered or protected as a trademark if it is functional — if it is “essential to the use or purpose of the article or it affects the cost or quality of the article.”
Columns & Departments
Jeff Ginsberg and George Soussou
Federal Circuit: Collateral Estoppel Can Apply to Patents With Claims Similar To Those in Previously Litigated
Federal Circuit Uses 'Rule of Reason' To Determine Patent Owner Had an Early Reduction to Practice